Amchem Prods., Inc. v. Windsor

Holding that courts are "bound to enforce" Rule 23's certification requirements, even where it means decertifying a class after they had reached a settlement agreement and submitted it to the court for approval

Gen. Tel. Co. of Sw. v. Falcon

Holding that named plaintiff must prove “much more than the validity of his own claim”; the individual plaintiff must show that “the individual's claim and the class claims will share common questions of law or fact and that the individual's claim will be typical of the class claims,” explicitly referencing the “commonality” and “typicality” requirements of Rule 23

Eisen v. Carlisle Jacquelin

Holding that individual notice to class members identifiable through reasonable efforts is mandatory in (b) actions

Gen. Tel. Co. v. EEOC

Holding that "the EEOC's enforcement suits should not be considered representative actions subject to Rule 23"

Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp.

Holding that " common nucleus of facts and potential legal remedies dominate[d]" over "idiosyncratic differences between state consumer protection laws" where a nationwide class of minivan buyers’ claims turned on "questions of [the manufacturer’s] prior knowledge of the [vehicle’s] deficiency, the design defect, and a damages remedy"

Corning Glass Works v. Brennan

Holding that an employer has the burden of proof to show that it falls within the stated exemption

J. I. Case Co. v. Borak

Holding that “a right of action [under Section 14(a) ] exists as to both derivative and direct causes”

Hanon v. Dataproducts Corp.

Holding that the defendants' statements emphasizing superior quality were material because "a reasonable jury could conclude that [the company] publicly released optimistic statements ... when it knew [its product] could not be built reliably"

In re Am. Med. Sys., Inc.

Holding that design and manufacturing differences across ten different models of the same product meant potentially varying results on strict liability, fraudulent misrepresentation, negligence, and failure to warn claims

Dunleavy v. Nadler

Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding an incentive award to the class representatives

Section 17200 - Unfair competition defined

Prohibiting unlawful business practices

Section 608.016 - Payment for each hour of work; trial or break-in period not excepted

Requiring employer to pay for each hour worked, including during break periods

Section 541.200 - [Effective until 7/1/2024] General rule for administrative employees

Providing that the administrative exemption can also apply if the employee’s primary duty is directly related to the management or general business operations of the employer’s customers

Section 541.100 - [Effective 7/1/2024] General rule for executive employees

Requiring payment "on a salary basis at a rate of not less than $455 per week"

Section 541.201 - Directly related to management or general business operations

Listing examples of the functional areas related to "management or general business operations"

Section 541.1 - Terms used in regulations

Requiring that an exempt employee's work "includes the customary and regular direction of the work of two or more other employees"

Section 541.104 - Two or more other employees